Judge weighs the merits of a lawsuit alleging 'Real Housewives' creators
abused a cast member
Send a link to a friend
[November 15, 2024]
By LARRY NEUMEISTER
NEW YORK (AP) — The lawyer for a former cast member of the “Real
Housewives of New York” told a federal judge Thursday that the First
Amendment cannot shield the show’s creators from a lawsuit alleging that
the show’s participants were subjected to a “rotted workplace culture.”
Attorney Sarah Matz said the lawsuit brought by Leah McSweeney earlier
this year should advance to the stage where evidence can be gathered for
trial.
Adam Levin, a lawyer for defendants including entertainer Andy Cohen,
one of the show’s producers, and the Bravo channel, told the judge that
the lawsuit’s allegations were protected by the First Amendment and that
it should be dismissed at a stage in which the judge is required to
assume the allegations are true.
The judge did not immediately rule on the future of the lawsuit, which
seeks unspecified damages for mental, emotional, physical pain along
with impairment of life's joys and lost future earnings.
The lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court alleges that McSweeney, who
suffers from alcoholism, was pressured to drink booze on the show and
was retaliated against when she wanted to stay sober or was denied
reasonable accommodations to aid her efforts at sobriety.
It also alleges that the defendants “employed psychological warfare
intentionally weaponized to break Ms. McSweeney's psyche,” particularly
when she was intimidated and prevented from visiting her dying
grandmother through threats to cut her pay or fire her if she left the
filming location.
“They knew she was trying to be sober,” Matz told the judge. “The show
is not called the ‘Drunk Housewives of New York City.’”
[to top of second column]
|
Leah McSweeney attends the Harper's Bazaar Icons and Bloomingdale's
150th anniversary party at Bloomingdale's 59th Street, Sept. 9,
2022, in New York. (Photo by Charles Sykes/Invision/AP, File)
The judge, who said he had never
seen the show, asked each side numerous questions and seemed
inclined to, at a minimum, strike some allegations from the lawsuit
that pertained to events on camera.
Levin told him the lawsuit should be tossed in its entirety. He said
ruling in favor of the claims made in McSweeney's lawsuit “would
kill” some television and Broadway stage shows if the First
Amendment did not protect the producers of shows.
Particularly when it comes to a reality television show, the cast
member becomes the message of the show and “you can't separate the
person from the speech,” Levin said.
“What are the limits a director can do to induce the behavior the
director wants?” the judge asked as he questioned whether a director
could demand that show participants not sleep for two days before
filming or subject themselves to a physical assault just before they
go on camera.
Levin said there were limits to First Amendment protection for the
creators of a communicative show, but he said they were narrow in
scope. McSweeney's lawsuit, he said, did not fall within the narrow
exceptions, such as when a producer might commit a criminal felony
offense during the production of a show.
All contents © copyright 2024 Associated Press. All rights reserved |